Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Mar 24, 2006.
Could there be a more blatant, arrogant "F--- you" than this? Bush is telling Congress clearly that he doesn't feel obligated to obey the law they passed? And he thinks a memo will suffice to "allow" him to do this?
For crying out loud, somebody impeach this bastard already!
bush holds himself above the law, plain and simple. i'm just waiting for those who enforce the laws to do something about it.
You'll be waiting a looooooooooooong time.
Where the %%$#%##%%$#% is the @#$@#ing press in this country anymore?
This story has been on my Google news page all day and yet the president signs a law and decides it doesn't apply to him and I only find it via these forums? un-@#$!@#!-believable!
I know! It's totally insane! What has happened to our media fitting into the whole 'checks and balances' idea? This seems to be more of a check and more checks scenario. That doesn't bode well for our rights or for the future of our theocracy .
I would think it will be pretty hard to avoid accountability when you have it arranged to increasingly consolidate power into one office.
I am not sure of the tactical gamble something like this presents for Bush. He is not currently popular with the populace, he is alienating the Congress and his actions ultimately have consequences that will likely bring self-interest (from the Congress and the people) to a point higher than ideological agreement. And these groups are far from powerless.
Bush just may be given just enough rope to hang himself.
This is more of his "unitary executive" nonsense (otherwise known as Führerprinzip*.) He will get away with it as long as there is no oversight by a congress which see their primary role as protecting Bush from any criticism, or courts that are increasingly stacked with far right judges.
*For those keeping track of Godwin's law violators, note this is not the first Nazi reference in the thread. Unless pictures don't count.
I wonder if there was a cute rule that was analogous to Godwin's law that shamed anyone who would talk about Hitler as he became Hitler.
I also wonder if in 50 years there will be yet another cute internet "law" that will forbid anyone to talk about Bush and the American descent into fascism in such a fashion.
Finally! Somebody else says it besides me! I don't care about this playing politics garbage about how he'll look like a martyr. He's most likely broken the law several times. IMPEACH. THAT"S WHAT IT'S FOR.
Well it's certainly not going to be the last, either.
I don't care if anyone believes this or not, but I came up with a design for my e-store this morning, before I'd read this thread. At the time, I was really waffling over whether it was too over-the-top, too much like those hyperbolic Bush-Nazi references that litter all kinds of liberal websites.
I don't think that anymore.
For all those making or tempted to make Bush/Hitler comparisons, may I remind you that Hitler, despite considerable and glaring faults, was actually pretty competent at acheiving his goals.
Hitler took a country in pretty crappy shape and made it momentarily great (in some senses), while Bush took a country in pretty excellent shape and ran it into the ground.
I would think Mugabe of Zimbabwe might be a more apt comparison...
But Bush made the trains run on t... no, no, wait. He's trying to stop the trains altogether.
More interesting stuff:
Here's John Dean (of Watergate fame), discussing presidential "signing statements" as used by Bush:
Link. My bold.
Note that paragraph in bold, BTW. It was a hypothetical concept, written on January 13th of this year...and in March it's come true.
Man, this had better be The Next Big News Story, or we should all start beseiging the media with angry letters asking why.
I used to feel that way too, but then stuff like this happens, and I begin to think they may have a point. Although, as BF put it, Hitler was popular with his own people because of all the "good" he seemed to do for Germany that they overlooked some of the beginnings of the atrocities. Bush doesn't have that luxury. And though we aren't putting Muslims and homosexuals in concentration camps (yet), the administration sure makes life tough for them and we sure have killed or injured a lot of innocent people in the "war on terror". Of course, by the time the Germans really started to realize what was going on, those that cared really couldn't do anything because they were too afraid and probably felt helpless to stop it. Something we seem to have in common with them.
By the time Hitler did away with the oversights, which Bush is dangerously close to also doing, it was already too late.
Hey, pseudo, a humorous aside doesn't mean I'm not taking Bush and his attempts to crown himself King seriously. We really need no Nazi comparisons to be alarmed by what he is doing. The idea that he can use signing statements to opt out of laws should be outrageous enough for anybody.
I wasn't blaming you for anything, rather I was lamenting the asininity of such a thing as Godwin's law and its frequent invocation.
I don't know how asinine it is in and of itself. But Bush has certainly pushed the envelope and made fascism references more acceptable.
Back to the topic:
I didn't want to wait until my anger (and motivation) had subsided, so I've sent this e-mail out to my two Republican senators:
I sent a similar one to my representative, Sherrod Brown, though the last few paragraphs were not nearly as threatening. Sherrod's a good guy and one of the more liberal members of Congress. Instead I told him (in more polite words) that the Democrats should stop being such pussies and start pushing for an impeachment investigation, and that the Dems would be surprised at how much public support would be behind them.
We need a new law: "The first person to invoke Godwin's Law, loses the debate."
May I call it "IJ Reilly's Law"?
no offense meant, no offense taken.
So as another person who argued that we weren't fascist (though I believe I added the caveat "yet") are you also almost ready to concede that we are, in fact, headed quickly down that road? Or at least close? If this isn't as close as you can be to fascism without actually being it, I don't know what is.
Though I'm sure BushCo will find some way to surprise me without actually surprising me.
If you're keeping track, a couple of days ago it was almost impossible to find this story. Today, ABC News has picked it up.
Now will people react to it, or will they just shrug and surf on to whogivesas#it.com?
Let's hope they react.
The people I've talked to, it's not that they don't care, because they do. They just feel powerless to stop it. Come Nov. '06, that will change. Even some Republicans I've talked to are voting Dem. They don't even care who it is. One of them even said "I hope it's somebody good, because I'm voting for them". Think about that for a sec.